Cadillac CTS, Buick Regal Among Cars That Depreciate Quickest

Sponsored Links

Buying a new car is (normally) one of the worst investments to be made. As soon as the front wheels exit the dealership lot, depreciation rears its ugly face. However, not all cars depreciate as quickly. Some depreciate at lighting fast speeds, though.

If you own a Buick Regal or Cadillac CTS, you may want to look away. According to the latest research from iSeeCars, both sedans have a rapid depreciation factor, much higher than the average 21.2 percent figure.

The Buick Regal depreciates 31.2 percent after the first year. Attaching the figure to a monetary value, that’s $10,117. The Cadillac CTS is worse, depreciating at 31.8 percent after one year of ownership. Again, putting that in dollars and cents, it equals out to $13,351.

Cadillac specifically has been working to reduce the depreciation factor associated with its cars by limiting fleet sales and retargeting its price strategy. In the meantime, though, there’s no fighting the market’s depreciation factor on either of these sedans.

You may also like...

Sponsored Links

17 Comments

That’s why you buy this car used – cpo if you can. I am looking for one now. I just don’t like the dash controls – sensor delays would drive me crazy. But the cpo extends bumper to bumper warranty = make easier to own.

I said months ago that this would be the result of the New President’s “Value Pricing Strategy”. If a car is priced to high the re-sales value will suffer. This is exactly what’s happening to the Cadillac CTS. The market is speaking. The used car market sets the value. Any car, truck or SUV that depreciates excessively is simply priced too high when new. Its not “Rocket Science” its “logic”. Any who doesn’t understand that doesn’t understand, the Automobile Industry or business in general, for that matter. I have a 2014 CTS and I love it, but I paid way too much for it…luckily I leased it !!!

Several years ago, when the economy was in the toilet, nearing the end of Bush II’s term in office and the cash for clunkers Obama incentive, wasn’t there some big GM proclamation about how there would be better trade-in values offered for GM vehicles than in the past through its dealers???

I went over to my local MAJOR GM dealer two weeks ago and put my feelers out about trading in my 2011 Camaro convertible with only 9000 miles toward a new 2017 GMC Denali and I was offered less than 50% of its price when new. That’s absolutely PATHETIC!

Well, after having returned to GM for eight years after 30 years of Honda ownership, it appears as though I’m either going back to Honda for a Pilot or a Toyota Highlander. At least those will hold their value!

Comparing the retained value of a convertible sports car (I am assuming it is a 6cyl) to a family hauler is like comparing apples to oranges… of course the practical and more widely useable vehicle will hold its value better. It is what the market will always favor. Look at the resale value of GM fullsize SUV’s and their market share for NEW and USED… Furthermore, the Camaro is in the list of top 10 for resale. The reason for this 50% hit on your car is the dealers fault, the Denali is in high demand and are easy for dealers to make money on, which is why they offered you such a low trade value. They can easily sell it to the next guy who doesn’t have a trade aka another used unit for their lot

It’s definitely something GM needs to work on . I usually keep an eye on the lease turn ins at a couple of dealerships in my area . Luxury cars seem to be a steal if you look at the LaCrosse and XTS . These come back after a two year lease with 30 ,000 miles on the clock and are certified as long as any car comes back with less than 50,000 miles .
That CPO car has had the two years maintenance done on schedule and has hardly any abuse and before its sold has had a 172-point inspection . So you can get a XTS Platinum , certified for 6yrs. and pay 35 to 40 grand . Thats good for consumers but not the company . There are people that will say that you are paying an extra $ 1000.00 for that CPO , but atleast it’s been looked over and you get the extended warranty .

The best way to limit depreciation is not by limiting fleet sales, it’s by increasing the reliability and giving customers a transferable warranty. Look at which common cars depreciate most slowly – probably Toyota, because they are known for reliability.

Also it’s a reality the luxury cars depreciate more quickly than cheaper cars. Reason being, the richest people like having new cars and their budgets aren’t very limited. In the used market, there are a lot more people who can buy a $10k car than a $20k car, even if the $20k car used to cost $60k and the $10k car used to cost $20k. To a lot of people, a car is a car and even used car luxury is out of reach.

Bottom line, if you enjoy luxury cars but are somewhat of a cheapskate, it’s awesome that luxury cars (especially American ones) depreciate so quickly. If you are GM and you actually care about resale value, do what you can to improve reliability and the warranty, but also be realistic that luxury cars are simply going to depreciate faster than “mainstream” cars.

Depreciation is the view of the buyer. I had a 1995 Buick Regal and if I believed in that ridiculous depreciation, it would have no value after five years! I kept it for 21 years, and sold it for over $2,000 in December 2015. So if you want the best value of a vehicle, keep it running for twenty years or more, then sell it (don’t trade it in).

I feel sorry for those idiots that buy a brand new car every three years or less. That is throwing money away! Buy it, keep it longer, and save that money in your account. After twenty years you have enough to buy a new one with cash left over.

Ray: What a novel idea! Drive a 21-yr old car. Then sell it yourself in a market clamoring for classic, two-decade old Buicks. Your negotiation skills net you $2k. That kind of money puts a big dent in the avg. 2016 new car purchase–thats almost 8% right off the top before TT&L! I smell a book deal, Ray.

But why the hostility towards us poor “idiots” who lack your superior economic acumen? It’s a big highway out here Ray. If I want to drive fast and a Z06 convertible is the cost, I’ll spend my bucks on the Vette and then buy a ZR1 in 2018–depreciation be damned! But it won’t be Buick level.

“Throwing money away” Instead of “saving that money in your account” is another great thought, Ray. At around 1.2% APR, how much would I have to put into that “account” to reach avg. cost of new car in the next 20yrs?

(I think avg. new car costs around $33k in 2016.) I’m math-challenged, so please get back to me. We “idiots” appreciate your insights.

This is a case of simple supply and demand. Now fleet sales are only a part of this.

Lets face it the Regal is a nice car but expensive and older since it had been an Opel for a while.

Also the CTS and ATS are not high demand cars yet.

But on the other hand the ATS and CTS as being cheap in the resale market has lead to many buying them and being very pleased with them. It is becoming a very popular car at work as more people in the 25-45 year old age bracket are taking an interest in it. If it had not been for the price they would have never even considered it.

The trick now is as they go to replace these cars is to get them to pony up to buy them new.

Also in play is the SUV/CUV factor. Many sedans like this are just not selling like they were and those that are generally are the Cheaper Civic, And Hyundai models.

Also on cars like the Accord as they go to the used market the demand is high.

Much also in play is people feel safe buying a Honda uses and not many other models due to claims of better quality. In come cases that is true and others it is not so much true. Other co workers who though they did well buying Hyundai sit there at their desk comparing warranty claims often. I have three just in my department and all three have had more issues in one year than I have had in my latest Chevy and GMC since 2008.

Both cars are up for a make over soon and I hope that this will change minds.

I know the Regal name hold meaning to some folks and too often not the right meaning. A new name to really better represent a new start for Buick would not be a bad Idea. New names have helped the other models and this was the last hold out. The old W body Regal was not a bad car but nothing to write home about either. The Lacrosse has done better than the first gen but it at lease was not an old name.

Although an older platform, my 2016 Regal Premium II is an excellent vehicle and appears quite well made. Likely to hang onto this for at least 8-10 years, but even if I sold after just a year of ownership, my hit would be no more than 20%. How? Got this during a 16% off deal and used GM credit card points. I’d be upset if I paid near list, however, which really was rather steep. Shudder to think what a TTV6 GS version in the next generation might cost.

Comparing what I paid with what I got to my brother in law’s 2017 Lexus ES350, I’m ahead by WELL over 10k already. And talk about an older platform, that one has been around for at least a decade or more.

Is this figured from original MSRP? We all know CTS had/has a high MSRP that virtually no one actually pays. Due to lack of demand and overproduction, these cars were steeply discounted meaning a good part of their “lost” value was lost by GM, who was forced to sell them with $9,000 to $12,000 discounts. Thus, the consumer may not have lost the full amount.

I’m not saying that they aren’t still a depreciation disaster but the situation for buyers might be a bit better than at first glance it appears.

My point exactly for the ’16 Regal I bought last January. Between a huge discount and GM card points, I was already about 22% below MSRP. Even with 31.2% depreciation, my actual “loss” for that first year, based on full price, would be around 9%.

The car is well made, quick, quiet and absolutely loaded with tech and safety features. Have to admit that I’ll never have the nerve to see if the autonomous braking works, however.